Search

Introduction: The brain is a frequent site of metastases in NSCLC, and screening for asymptomatic brain metastases (BM) is increasingly advised in NSCLC guidelines. An asymptomatic BM diagnosis may trigger anxiety for future neurologic problems and can negatively affect quality of life of patients and their relatives. Therefore, we performed this qualitative study. Methods: Three focus group discussions were organized with patients with NSCLC and asymptomatic BM (N = 3–4 per group) and separately with their relatives, to explore this psychosocial impact. Two researchers independently performed an inductive content analysis. Results: A total of 10 patients and 10 relatives participated in six focus groups. A diagnosis of BM caused feelings of distress and anxiety in both patients and relatives. These feelings diminished over time in case of a tumor responding to systemic therapy. The diagnosis of BM was not perceived as more distressful than other metastases, and scan-related anxiety was not experienced. Although magnetic resonance imaging screening and follow-up were thought of as burdensome, follow-up was valued. The coping strategies of both groups seemed related to personality and to the efficacy of the given systemic therapy. Relatives appreciated peer support of other relatives during the focus groups, and they seemed open for future psychological support. Conclusions: Asymptomatic BM diagnosis can cause anxiety and distress, but this diminishes over time with effective systemic treatment. Although patients perceive magnetic resonance imaging as burdensome, they value follow-up screening and imaging. Relatives highly appreciated peer support, and psychological distress of relatives should not be overlooked.

BACKGROUND: In 2016, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) defined an international consensus recommendation of the most important outcomes for lung cancer patients. The European Health Outcomes Observatory (H2O) initiative aimed to develop an updated patient-centered core outcome set (COS) for lung cancer, to capture the patient perspective of the impact of lung cancer and (novel) treatments using a combination of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments and clinical data as a means to drive value-based health-care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An international, expert team of patient representatives, multidisciplinary healthcare professionals, academic researchers and pharmaceutical industry representatives (n = 17) reviewed potential outcomes generated through literature review. A broader group of patients/patient representatives (n = 31), healthcare professionals / academic researchers (n = 83), pharmaceutical industry representatives (n = 26), and health authority representatives (n = 6) participated in a Delphi study. In two survey rounds, participants scored the relevance of outcomes from a preliminary list. The threshold for consensus was defined as ≥ 70 % of participants scoring an outcome as 'highly relevant'. In concluding consensus-meeting rounds, the expert multidisciplinary team finalized the COS. RESULTS: The preliminary list defined by the core group consisted of 102 outcomes and was prioritized in the Delphi procedure to 64. The final lung cancer COS includes: 1) case-mix factors (n = 27); 2) PROs related to health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (n = 25); 3) clinical outcomes (n = 12). Patient-reported symptoms beyond domains included in the ICHOM lung cancer set in 2016 were insomnia, nausea, vomiting, anxiety, depression, lack of appetite, gastric problems, constipation, diarrhoea, dysphagia, and haemoptysis. CONCLUSIONS: We will implement the lung cancer COS in Europe within the H2O initiative by collecting the outcomes